↓ Skip to main content

Research Results: Preserving Newborn Blood Samples

Overview of attention for article published in Science Translational Medicine, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Research Results: Preserving Newborn Blood Samples
Published in
Science Translational Medicine, November 2012
DOI 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004474
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Huckaby Lewis, Michael E. Scheurer, Robert C. Green, Amy L. McGuire

Abstract

Retention and use, without explicit parental permission, of residual dried blood samples from newborn screening has generated public controversy over concerns about violations of family privacy rights and loss of parental autonomy. The public debate about this issue has included little discussion about the destruction of a potentially valuable public resource that can be used for research that may yield improvements in public health. The research community must advocate for policies and infrastructure that promote retention of residual dried blood samples and their use in biomedical research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 6%
Netherlands 1 6%
Unknown 15 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 29%
Student > Master 3 18%
Other 2 12%
Professor 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Energy 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2017.
All research outputs
#738,176
of 15,257,585 outputs
Outputs from Science Translational Medicine
#1,559
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,164
of 153,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Translational Medicine
#29
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,257,585 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 63.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 153,027 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.